User:TylerRzemek/sandbox

Closure or need for closure are psychological terms that describe the desire or need individuals have for information that will allow them to conclude an issue that had previously been clouded in ambiguity and uncertainty. Upon reaching this conclusion, they are now able to attain a state of epistemic closure.

The term cognitive closure has been defined as "a desire for definite knowledge on some issue and the eschewal of confusion and ambiguity."[1] Need for closure describes an individual’s desire for a clear solution as opposed to enduring ambiguity.

Contents

1 Implications 2 In education 3 Need For Closure Scale 3.1 Research 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

Implications

A need for cognitive closure may occur while engaged in goal-driven or goal-motivated cognitive functions (e.g., attention control, memory recall, information selection and processing, cognitive inhibition, etc.). Ideally we would hope that most people will attempt to acquire new knowledge they hope will satisfy questions regarding particular issues (specific cognitive closure) irrespective of whether that knowledge points to a conclusion having positive or negative implications for them (non-specific cognitive closure). But because urgency and permanence are central to the motivational core of this overall process, individuals (or groups) may be compelled, consciously or unconsciously, to obtain information prematurely and irrespective of content.[2][3]

It is of concern then that causal and motivational mechanisms driving the process of cognitive closure may sometimes invite bias in: 1) selecting the most relevant information one should attend to for increasing chances of adaptation; 2) initiating and sustaining cognitive manipulations that are required to achieve particular outcomes; 3) making judgments and assessments of input information; and 4) weighing information during the course of decision-making.

Additionally, and especially in those with strong needs for certainty (as measured on NFC Scale), the impulse to achieve cognitive closure may sometimes produce or evoke a mood instability, and/or truncated perceptions of one's available behavioral choices, should some newly acquired information challenge preconceptions that they had long considered to be certain, permanent and inviolate e.g. certain religious or ethical views and values.

Thus it is apparent that the need for cognitive closure or the need to avoid closure may have important implications for both personal and inter-personal thoughts and actions.

Need To Avoid Closure

Functionally opposite to the need for closure is the need to avoid closure. Need to avoid closure reflects the desire to suspend judgmental commitment.[16] It also contains subcategories of specific and non-specific need to avoid closure. Avoidence of specific closure reflects the desire to avoid specific answers to one's questions.[16] Non-specific need to avoid closure is much like need for closure irrespective of whether or not this new knowledge points to a conclusion having positive or negative implications for them. Those two needs are conceptualized as ends of a continuum ranging from strong strivings for closure to strong resistance of closure.[12] This is applied in the NFC Scale. The need to avoid closure may stem from the perceived costs of possessing closure (e.g., envisioned penalties for an erroneous closure or perceived drawbacks of actions implied by closure) and the perceived benefits of lacking closure (e.g., immunity from possible criticism of any given closure)[12] The need to avoid closure is controlled by ones desire to avoid negative consequences of achieving closure of a situation or to continue the benefits of not closing but elongating a situation.

Lack of Closure

The lack of closure leaves a situation in ambiguity. People high in need for closure seek to avoid this ambiguity at all costs where people high in need to avoid closure strive to make situations more ambiguous.some perceived benefits of cognitive closure may relate to predictability, the basis for action, or social status accorded the possessors of knowledge (i.e., "experts"). Similarly, some perceived costs of lacking closure may relate to the additional time and effort required to attain closure, or the unpleasantness of process whereby closure must be reached. Occasionally, however, lack of closure maybe perceived to offer various advantages such as freedom from a constraining commitment, neutrality in an acrimonious dispute, the maintenance of a romantic mystery and so on.[17] Though lack of closure is generally thought of as being negative, its clear that closure and lack of closure have positive or negative implements depending on the person and situation surrounding them.

In education

Formal education environments, such as elementary and secondary schools, present opportunities for learners to acquire new knowledge and skills, and to achieve deep, domain-specific conceptual mastery which, through well-designed pedagogical guidance and academic study, may enhance future career readiness, civic engagement, and general well-being. However, although it is understood that the basic principles of learning assert the importance of attending to students’ prior knowledge, fostering conceptual understanding, and cultivating metacognitive awareness, students must also become engaged and be willing to tolerate and cognitively work through the intellectual ambiguity often associated with exposure to novel information and tasks.[4][5][6][7]

Yet for students who have high need for cognitive closure, this phenomenon may inadvertently lead to the inhibition of cognitive functions and processes essential to the learning process, so that they can maintain their prior certainty and/or perceived permanence of personally or socially important ideas, even if those ideas or knowledge are distinctly unrelated to any specific content or information being presented in the classroom. In instances such as these, an individual’s desire for cognitive closure in another area may outweigh her/his motivation to expend cognitive resources toward learning new information. As a result, the student may appear uninterested and susceptible to under-achieving e.g. poor grades or not performing to expected levels).

Unfortunately, in the absence of understanding and consideration of how need for cognitive closure may influence academic and/or achievement motivation, educators may erroneously conclude that a student does not have a desire to learn or that she/he has a cognitive, psychological, intellectual, or behavioral deficiency that is impeding the learning process. This is not to suggest that need for cognitive closure is a suitable explanation for all learning problems; however, in working with students who appear to be experiencing learning challenges manifested through amotivation or low motivation, it would not be unreasonable to explore need for cognitive closure as a potential factor. Need For Closure Scale

The need for closure varies across individuals, situations, and cultures. A person with a high need for closure prefers order and predictability, is decisive and closed-minded, and is uncomfortable with ambiguity.[8] Someone rating low on need for closure will express more ideational fluidity and creative acts.[9]

The Need for Closure Scale (NFCS) was developed by Arie Kruglanski, Donna Webster, and Adena Klem in 1993. Items on the scale include statements such as “I think that having clear rules and order at work is essential to success.” and “I do not like situations that are uncertain”. Items such as “Even after I’ve made up my mind about something, I am always eager to consider a different opinion.” and “I like to have friends who are unpredictable” are reverse scored.[10] Composed of 42 items, the scale has been used in numerous research studies and has been translated into multiple languages. In 2007, Roets and Van Hiel revised the scale, their objective being to resolve some psychometric problems, and thus to make of it a stable, one-dimensional metric.[11]In 2011, Roets and Van Hiel created an abridged and empirically validated NFC scale consisting of only 15 items from the original NFC.[15]

Items on the Need for Closure Scale exhibit low to moderate statistical associations with: “+ for authoritarianism, + for intolerance of ambiguity, + dogmatism, - association with cognitive complexity, -impulsivity, + need for order and structure, among several other cognitive tools and personality traits.[12] High NFC scores consistently correlate with items on the C-Scale(conservatism) as well as other measures of political and social conservatism.(Kruglanski 2003, Altemeyer, 1981, 1988, 1996, 1998) Research

Individuals scoring high on the NFCS are more likely to attempt to draw closure by relying on incipient cues, and the first-encountered apparent fit.[9] The need for closure is also said to predispose a very narrow or shallow information search, along with a higher tendency to use cognitive heuristics, when seeking solutions. (Van Hiel and Mervielde, 2003)

In studies on creativity, individuals with high need-for-closure ratings had low creativity scores. High scorers more frequently produced novel solutions that motivated and inspired others in their groups, and the outcomes of the projects in which they participated were rated as correspondingly more productive.[9]

Most research on the need for closure has investigated its relation to social stimuli. However, recent research suggests that it may also predict responses to non-social stimuli.[13]

Some researchers have reached the conclusion that a desire for simple structure is what underlies (need for) cognitive closure.[14] Others predict that stressors such as time pressure lead to a tendency to stick with a given strategy because of a heightened personal need for closure.[1] See also

Dogmaticism Need for cognition Heuristics Catharsis Allocution: an opportunity or legal requirement for someone being convicted of a crime to attempt to make amends verbally. Twelve-step program Grief Zero-risk bias

References

^ Jump up to: a b Webster, Donna M.; Arie W. Kruglanski (1997). "Cognitive and Social Consequences of the Need for Cognitive Closure". European Review of Social Psychology 18: 133–173. ISSN 1479-277X. Jump up ^ Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: Seizing and freezing. Psychological Review, 103, 263–283. Jump up ^ Webster, Donna M.; Arie W. Kruglanski (1997). "Cognitive and Social Consequences of the Need for Cognitive Closure". European Review of Social Psychology 18: 133–173. Jump up ^ DeBacker, T. K.,&Crowson,H.M. (2006). Influence on cognitive engagement and achievement: Personal epistemology and achievementmotives. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 353–551. Jump up ^ Harlow, L., Debacker, TK., Crowson, M.H. (2011). Need for Closure, Achievement Goals, and Cognitive Engagement in High School Students. Journal Of Educational Research, 104(2), 110-119. Jump up ^ DeBacker, T. K., & Crowson, H. (2008). Measuring need for closure in classroom learners. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 711-732. Jump up ^ Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Jump up ^ Van Hiel, A., Mervielde, I. (2003) The Need for closure and the Spontaneous Use of Complex and Simple Cognitive Structures. The Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 559-568. ^ Jump up to: a b c Chirumbolo, A., Livi, S., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Kruglanski, A. (2004) Effects of Need for Closure on Creativity in Small Group Interactions. European Journal of Personality, 18, 265-278. Jump up ^ Kruglanski, A. W., Webster, D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861-876. Jump up ^ Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2007). Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 266-280. Jump up ^ Webster, D., Kruglanski, A. (1994) Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062 Jump up ^ Rubin, M., Paolini, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2011). The relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias: An investigation of generality and process. International Journal of Psychology, 46, 206-213.[View] Jump up ^ Neuberg, S., Judice, T., & West, S (1997). What the need for Closure Scale measures and what it does not: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1396-1412. Jump up ^ Roets, A., & VanHiel, A. (2011). Item Selection and Validation of a Brief, 15-Item Version of the Need For Closure Scale. Personality and Individual differences, 50, 90-94 Jump up ^ Mayseless, O., Kruglanski, A.W. (1990) Classic and Current Social Comparison Research: Expanding the Perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 195-208 Jump up ^ Kruglanski, A.W. (1990) Lay Epistemic Theory in Social- Cognitive Psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 181-197 External links

Robert Fulford's column about the word "closure" Comments on the Concept of Closure Sorrow and Closure Closure in Gestalt psychology: Sensation and Perception Gestalt Therapy / Gestalt Psychology